Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Jessemadnote39

Realistic Trade suggestions for improvement

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

To be fair, the Flames don't make the playoffs in 2017 if they didn't have Elliott.

 

His 2nd half was the reason for the 10 game winning streak and march to the playoffs. 

 

Kyrou would have been nice, but there's no guarantee the Flames took him. We have no idea who they liked. They could just have easily liked Pascal Laberge, taken one pick behind Kyrou, more than Kyrou. Laberge has yet to play in the NHL, despite being a better jr than Kyrou, it can be argued. The draft is so volatile. 

 

It all worked out though, they got Dube in the late 2nd. In a re-draft he's an early 2nd, if not a 1st though


well, to me missing the playoffs would’ve been fine. The team at the time could have used another rebuild year to round out the roster. This is what added to mediocre. 
 

he did play good in that second half but lost confidence in the playoffs. Plus the team didn’t play that well either. Losing 4games to nothing tells me all I need to know. We had no business being there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


I didn’t want to trade for him before the trade, when there was talk about it, I just knew the team wasn’t near ready defensively to warrant that goalie. I don’t think I am being harsh, at the time I was against the deal and it was more about the Flames than the Goaltender. And plus, I agree with you there, I don’t think they were the right goalies either. 
 

I think it was both. The team just wasn’t that good at the time and the mental breakdowns kill us all of the time. We weren’t getting a Price or rope 5-10 goalie. Numbers might have said otherwise with Elliott, but he was also on a deep D Blues team coached by the most defensive minded coach in the game. Hitchcock... I was worried his numbers were inflated.

 

I get that there’s merit in trying. We had nothing.

 

We reportedly had tried to trade for Bishop and MAF, so consider yourself lucky.

One would have cost Tkachuk, the other a huge contract plus whatever the trade would have been.

Fast forward to today and MAF is 36 and the cap hit is $7m.

 

It was a decent trade that could have worked out, but the goalie was more a product of their system.

A 2nd if it worked out (plus the conditional) would be a fair trade off for a player that may not be a difference maker.

Can't always get a difference make Janko instead of a Vasilevskiy.

(sarcasm off)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

We reportedly had tried to trade for Bishop and MAF, so consider yourself lucky.

One would have cost Tkachuk, the other a huge contract plus whatever the trade would have been.

Fast forward to today and MAF is 36 and the cap hit is $7m.

 

It was a decent trade that could have worked out, but the goalie was more a product of their system.

A 2nd if it worked out (plus the conditional) would be a fair trade off for a player that may not be a difference maker.

Can't always get a difference make Janko instead of a Vasilevskiy.

(sarcasm off)

 


ha!

 Ya, I think I just wasn’t ready for a goalie yet at the time. Nothing was going to change with the group we had, unless it was going to be a Price kind of goalie. 
 

if I remember correctly we made the playoffs because they had beer on the bus, plane or train. 
 

I was willing to run with whatever goalie we had because I didn’t see that big of an upgrade and I hoped BT would keep the picks to continue building the team. 
 

I am glad we found Markstrom in UFA. I hope he can keep up his play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, robrob74 said:


ha!

 Ya, I think I just wasn’t ready for a goalie yet at the time. Nothing was going to change with the group we had, unless it was going to be a Price kind of goalie. 
 

if I remember correctly we made the playoffs because they had beer on the bus, plane or train. 
 

I was willing to run with whatever goalie we had because I didn’t see that big of an upgrade and I hoped BT would keep the picks to continue building the team. 
 

I am glad we found Markstrom in UFA. I hope he can keep up his play. 

 

That was the end of Hiller and The Chad.

The end of Hartley and beginning of Hairboy.

There was nothing else available to us.

I can't remember if there were quality UFA's at the time, but I doubt there was much.

Without Elliott, we would have been in the running for 1st overall and lost it to NJ.

Maybe we switch spot with VAN and get Petey?

Doubt we would have picked him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, robrob74 said:


well, to me missing the playoffs would’ve been fine. The team at the time could have used another rebuild year to round out the roster. This is what added to mediocre. 
 

he did play good in that second half but lost confidence in the playoffs. Plus the team didn’t play that well either. Losing 4games to nothing tells me all I need to know. We had no business being there. 

It's easy to be jaded by the way the playoffs went. The Flames had a very good season. They finished 4th in the Pacific and in the 1st WC spot, 7 spots ahead of 9th place WPG. The Flames actually only had 1 less win than division winning Anaheim. ANA banked 13 loser points though. 

The sweep was very close, two games were 3-2, the others were 5-4 and 3-1 with an ENG. 

If they would have missed the playoffs, they still probably draft Valimaki as he was ranked in the 10-16 range. 

 

Give me the playoffs every year, reality is only one team ends their season the way they wanted. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

It's easy to be jaded by the way the playoffs went. The Flames had a very good season. They finished 4th in the Pacific and in the 1st WC spot, 7 spots ahead of 9th place WPG. The Flames actually only had 1 less win than division winning Anaheim. ANA banked 13 loser points though. 

The sweep was very close, two games were 3-2, the others were 5-4 and 3-1 with an ENG. 

If they would have missed the playoffs, they still probably draft Valimaki as he was ranked in the 10-16 range. 

 

Give me the playoffs every year, reality is only one team ends their season the way they wanted. 


 

wasn’t that the year that Gulutzen threw the tantrum and then gave the boys beer post game and then went on a run? I don’t think that was a very good season. I get it is hindsight but I am with Peeps and JJ, I wanted better picks or have a team to go deep in the playoffs. It was clear that it wasn’t going to be that team. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

That was the end of Hiller and The Chad.

The end of Hartley and beginning of Hairboy.

There was nothing else available to us.

I can't remember if there were quality UFA's at the time, but I doubt there was much.

Without Elliott, we would have been in the running for 1st overall and lost it to NJ.

Maybe we switch spot with VAN and get Petey?

Doubt we would have picked him.

 

I've heard Burke talk about the fact that he and the scouting department liked everything about Pettersson except for his size.

Given how much truculence mattered to him I bet even if we finished with the 1st overall he'd have wanted Nolan Patrick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the 2017 class though.

Its hard to beat most of that top 5.

Hischier, Patrick, Heiskanen, Makar, Pettersson.

That's nasty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sarasti said:

 

I've heard Burke talk about the fact that he and the scouting department liked everything about Pettersson except for his size.

Given how much truculence mattered to him I bet even if we finished with the 1st overall he'd have wanted Nolan Patrick.

I wonder how close a Bennett for Patrick swap is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2017 draft was so interesting.

 

Patrick was the early favourite to go 1. Hischier had a great season and ended up surpassing Patrick. Heiskanen had a great U18 and also saw his stock soar. Pettersson, like most European kids was a tough evaluation, most VAN fans wanted them to take Glass. I was able to chat with an NHL scout, he had Makar as his #1 player for 2017. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, robrob74 said:


 

wasn’t that the year that Gulutzen threw the tantrum and then gave the boys beer post game and then went on a run? I don’t think that was a very good season. I get it is hindsight but I am with Peeps and JJ, I wanted better picks or have a team to go deep in the playoffs. It was clear that it wasn’t going to be that team. 

We got Valimaki at 17 that year, I would say he is as promising or more promising than half the guys drafted ahead of him, so I don't view it as the failure that you do.  Sure when you only choose to view a certain hindsight you can say we lose that year and get Petterson or Makar, but if you just want to spin the good hindsight I'll play the bad hindsight and we could've landed Middlestadt or Andersson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sobieit said:

I wonder how close a Bennett for Patrick swap is?

 

Close but no cigar.

Bennett makes sense for the type of player he is, but that a lot to get in return.

We can't add a player to the deal, because they are sitting at 50 contracts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sak22 said:

We got Valimaki at 17 that year, I would say he is as promising or more promising than half the guys drafted ahead of him, so I don't view it as the failure that you do.  Sure when you only choose to view a certain hindsight you can say we lose that year and get Petterson or Makar, but if you just want to spin the good hindsight I'll play the bad hindsight and we could've landed Middlestadt or Andersson.


But let’s say you get a top 5, we have the opportunity to have Makar, Heiskenen (dallas won the lottery that year), Pettersson... not saying I don’t like Valamaki, but I think Makar or Heiskanen would be a bit better. Plus on the greater conversation is the 2nd we gave up for a goalie, Elliott. So it is more about the asset management than the place in the draft that year. When you add all of the assets on trying to solidify the goalie position and the failure to do it, it’s just extremely costly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


But let’s say you get a top 5, we have the opportunity to have Makar, Heiskenen (dallas won the lottery that year), Pettersson... not saying I don’t like Valamaki, but I think Makar or Heiskanen would be a bit better. Plus on the greater conversation is the 2nd we gave up for a goalie, Elliott. So it is more about the asset management than the place in the draft that year. When you add all of the assets on trying to solidify the goalie position and the failure to do it, it’s just extremely costly. 

And if you only attempt to address the goaltending situation through rushing prospects and signing cheap backups you run the chance of being Buffalo v2, where you have good players but can't keep them happy.  Buffalo could've been the team with one of the most enviable 1-2 punches down the middle in the league with Eichel and O'Reilly, next year they may not have either and the early returns on the O'Reilly return haven't been good.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sak22 said:

And if you only attempt to address the goaltending situation through rushing prospects and signing cheap backups you run the chance of being Buffalo v2, where you have good players but can't keep them happy.  Buffalo could've been the team with one of the most enviable 1-2 punches down the middle in the league with Eichel and O'Reilly, next year they may not have either and the early returns on the O'Reilly return haven't been good.  


 

I get that, but we were only slightly better for the goalies we did get. So it’s not like we did much better than them, I mean sure we were a bit more competitive but very mediocre at it. 
 

It’s not like Markstrom has been available through UFA so there weren’t many options. 
 

I get what you’re saying. I just feel BT spent a lot on goalies for short term fixes. I would’ve preferred him using an asset on a longer term fix. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always wanted to trade Backlund and after watching games without Backlund, has anyone else missed him?  Can we get a RW if he would agree to waive his NTC?

 

Mangiapane - Lindholm - Tkachuk

Gaudreau - Monahan - RW ($5.35-mil)

Lucic - Bennett - Dube

 

Could we get Derek Stepan?  He's having a bad year in Ottawa and allegedly wants a trade.  RHS C... but we can make him play RW.  The Sens get a veteran 2nd/3rd line Center signed long term to lead their youth... Stepan goes UFA end of season and saves us from having to protect him in an expansion draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

I've always wanted to trade Backlund and after watching games without Backlund, has anyone else missed him?  Can we get a RW if he would agree to waive his NTC?

 

Mangiapane - Lindholm - Tkachuk

Gaudreau - Monahan - RW ($5.35-mil)

Lucic - Bennett - Dube

 

Could we get Derek Stepan?  He's having a bad year in Ottawa and allegedly wants a trade.  RHS C... but we can make him play RW.  The Sens get a veteran 2nd/3rd line Center signed long term to lead their youth... Stepan goes UFA end of season and saves us from having to protect him in an expansion draft.

Stepan wants to be closer to his family he didn't request a trade. No chance of him coming to Calgary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very small sample size both ways, but so far in the game and a half he's been out the Flames have been dummied by one of the worst defensive teams in the league and then had a so/so effort again last night. Performances due in large part to the fact that their breakouts range from either bad to completely ineffective. 

 

yes I, and IMO the Flames, are missing him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Very small sample size both ways, but so far in the game and a half he's been out the Flames have been dummied by one of the worst defensive teams in the league and then had a so/so effort again last night. Performances due in large part to the fact that their breakouts range from either bad to completely ineffective. 

 

yes I, and IMO the Flames, are missing him. 

He gives us three more complete lines, without him it moves Simon and or Leivo up into the top 9, Which is a huge drop off from Backlund. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, robrob74 said:


But let’s say you get a top 5, we have the opportunity to have Makar, Heiskenen (dallas won the lottery that year), Pettersson... not saying I don’t like Valamaki, but I think Makar or Heiskanen would be a bit better. Plus on the greater conversation is the 2nd we gave up for a goalie, Elliott. So it is more about the asset management than the place in the draft that year. When you add all of the assets on trying to solidify the goalie position and the failure to do it, it’s just extremely costly. 

 

Yeah but look at our Top 4 pick, top 5 does not mean they pan out to be an all star. 

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

  • JESSE PULJUJARVI, Oilers, fourth in 2016. ...
  • MICHAEL DAL COLLE, Islanders, fifth in 2014. ...
  • ERIK GUDBRANSON, Panthers, third in 2010. ...
  • GRIFFIN REINHART, Islanders, fourth in 2012. ...
  • NAIL YAKUPOV, Oilers, first in 2012.

 

Daigle and Lawton also come to mind.

 

With Calgary's luck if we ever got a top 3 pick it would be a crap year and not a stacked one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, robrob74 said:


 

I get that, but we were only slightly better for the goalies we did get. So it’s not like we did much better than them, I mean sure we were a bit more competitive but very mediocre at it. 
 

It’s not like Markstrom has been available through UFA so there weren’t many options. 
 

I get what you’re saying. I just feel BT spent a lot on goalies for short term fixes. I would’ve preferred him using an asset on a longer term fix. 

 

to what extent were you willing to have him go?

 

the rumored price for Ben Bishop was Backlund and at least 1, maybe 2 2nd round picks. 

Fredrik Andersson cost a 1st and a 2nd

Would you have given up 1st round picks for either Martin Jones or MAF?

What goalie starting today do we think realistically could have been had via trade over the last 5-6 years?

 

I think we all would have preferred that but do we think it was doable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buffalo looks bad again. 0 shots in the third period yesterday.  Sitting last in their division. Remember because of the shortened season we are now a quarter of the way through, so I wouldn't say "its still early", so how long before they start to sell?

 

I think we have the assets.

Eichel For Monahan, Ryan, 2022 1st, 2nd 2023, (Pettersen, Ruzicka, Philips, Zav)

For obvious reasons. We would have IMO the best center depth in the North.

Gaudreau Eichel Bennett

Tkatchuk Lindholm Mang

Lucic Backlund Dube

OR

Olofsson For Bennett, 3rd 2023, (Pettersen, Ruzicka, Philips, Zav)

Get that RW for Monahan and Gaudreau.

Gaudreau Monahan Olofsson

Tkatchuk Lindholm Mang

Lucic Backlund Dube

 

Just fun to see. Does this make the team better.... I donno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sobieit said:

Buffalo looks bad again. 0 shots in the third period yesterday.  Sitting last in their division. Remember because of the shortened season we are now a quarter of the way through, so I wouldn't say "its still early", so how long before they start to sell?

 

I think we have the assets.

Eichel For Monahan, Ryan, 2022 1st, 2nd 2023, (Pettersen, Ruzicka, Philips, Zav)

For obvious reasons. We would have IMO the best center depth in the North.

Gaudreau Eichel Bennett

Tkatchuk Lindholm Mang

Lucic Backlund Dube

OR

Olofsson For Bennett, 3rd 2023, (Pettersen, Ruzicka, Philips, Zav)

Get that RW for Monahan and Gaudreau.

Gaudreau Monahan Olofsson

Tkatchuk Lindholm Mang

Lucic Backlund Dube

 

Just fun to see. Does this make the team better.... I donno.

In fairness Buffalo just had 6 games postponed and hadn't played in 2 weeks.  I don't think they make an Eichel move in season, nor do I believe they sell that low on Olofsson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cross16 said:

Very small sample size both ways, but so far in the game and a half he's been out the Flames have been dummied by one of the worst defensive teams in the league and then had a so/so effort again last night. Performances due in large part to the fact that their breakouts range from either bad to completely ineffective. 

 

yes I, and IMO the Flames, are missing him. 

 

What's holding us back more is not giving Gaudreau-Monahan a legit RW.  Bennett looked okay but he's much better Centering Lucic and Dube.  Ward should keep those 3 together permanently (assuming Bennett still wants to be here).  This means Backlund should be traded for a RW or he moves to RW with Gaudreau-Monahan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...